You're getting this from the Horsey's mouth: according to a very reliable source, I hear everybody's favorite old bag, Risker, has "strong reason" to believe that the list leaker was none other than the last Boy Scout himself, Rlevse. In Risker's mind, Rlevse still had some old access, emails, etc. It is also why the information was targeted in one direction (mostly against old enemies).

Do you think that Risker is on the right track? Or is she be sticking her thermometer in the wrong orifice?

You're getting this from the Horsey's mouth: according to a very reliable source, I hear everybody's favorite old bag, Risker, has "strong reason" to believe that the list leaker was none other than the last Boy Scout himself, Rlevse. In Risker's mind, Rlevse still had some old access, emails, etc. It is also why the information was targeted in one direction (mostly against old enemies).

Do you think that Risker is on the right track? Or is she be sticking her thermometer in the wrong orifice?

Makes as least as much sense as any other explanation I've seen, and more than most.

Group: Contributors
Posts: 7,919
Joined: Sat 17th Feb 2007, 12:55am
From: My name it means nothing. My age it means less. The country I come from is called the Mid-West.
Member No.: 981

QUOTE(Malleus @ Mon 21st November 2011, 2:18pm)

QUOTE(A Horse With No Name @ Mon 21st November 2011, 4:47pm)

You're getting this from the Horsey's mouth: according to a very reliable source, I hear everybody's favorite old bag, Risker, has "strong reason" to believe that the list leaker was none other than the last Boy Scout himself, Rlevse. In Risker's mind, Rlevse still had some old access, emails, etc. It is also why the information was targeted in one direction (mostly against old enemies).

Do you think that Risker is on the right track? Or is she be sticking her thermometer in the wrong orifice?

Makes as least as much sense as any other explanation I've seen, and more than most.

So are you done wasting people's time on this dreary shit? Little is worse than Wikiphedians manipulating and betraying each others with their "state secretes" and special inside sources.

You're getting this from the Horsey's mouth: according to a very reliable source, I hear everybody's favorite old bag, Risker, has "strong reason" to believe that the list leaker was none other than the last Boy Scout himself, Rlevse. In Risker's mind, Rlevse still had some old access, emails, etc. It is also why the information was targeted in one direction (mostly against old enemies).

Do you think that Risker is on the right track? Or is she be sticking her thermometer in the wrong orifice?

You're getting this from the Horsey's mouth: according to a very reliable source, I hear everybody's favorite old bag, Risker, has "strong reason" to believe that the list leaker was none other than the last Boy Scout himself, Rlevse. In Risker's mind, Rlevse still had some old access, emails, etc. It is also why the information was targeted in one direction (mostly against old enemies).

Do you think that Risker is on the right track? Or is she be sticking her thermometer in the wrong orifice?

A few days after the first leak appeared on WR User:Rlevse became a subject of SPI. SPI was started on June29, the first leak was posted on June 23 I believe. I believe the accusations against suspected sock of Rlevse started to appear around June 21. At least the user who was suspected in socking tried to leave Wikipedia on June 21 see hereSo, if Malice and BarkingMoon is Rlevse, the problems on Wikipedia that started on June 21 could have triggered appearance of the leaks on June 23.

I am not sure if BarkingMoon was Rlevse , but whoever the user was Rlevse could have known what was going on.

On the other hand if the new user even was Rlevse did it mean he was socking? After all vanished CrisO created a new account and is allowed to contribute to wikipedia.Whatever Rlevse and BarkingMoon stories are I feel sorry for them, as almost for everybody, who gets mercilessly attacked by so called wikipedia community.

You're getting this from the Horsey's mouth: according to a very reliable source, I hear everybody's favorite old bag, Risker, has "strong reason" to believe that the list leaker was none other than the last Boy Scout himself, Rlevse. In Risker's mind, Rlevse still had some old access, emails, etc. It is also why the information was targeted in one direction (mostly against old enemies).

Do you think that Risker is on the right track? Or is she be sticking her thermometer in the wrong orifice?

Makes as least as much sense as any other explanation I've seen, and more than most.

So are you done wasting people's time on this dreary shit? Little is worse than Wikiphedians manipulating and betraying each others with their "state secretes" and special inside sources.

I could have agreed with you on this one, if you were consistent, but here's the thing:Malice was allowed to go on with his posts, without you or anybody else for that matter trying to stop it.I have not read all leaks, but I believe that some people (I do not mean any of the arbitrators) were really, really hurt by Malice's posts. So, if Malice posts were allowed, nothing is off the table now.I'd like to believe that Rlevse is not the leaker.

So are you done wasting people's time on this dreary shit? Little is worse than Wikiphedians manipulating and betraying each others with their "state secretes" and special inside sources.

Why don't you just fuck off back into whichever drain you emerged from?

Thank you, gentlemen. That will be enough.

I'm forced to agree with GBG in this case---treating WP's internal peccadilloes with any kind of "serious attention" is not useful effort. This could easily be Risker attempting to stab someone in the back for brownie points. She's done it before. It does not fix or improve Wikipedia, nor evenhelp explain the dysfunction to outsiders---it just makes Risker and friends into "celebrities".

They are not celebrated anything, they are very small and petty people engaged in pointless backroom manipulation.

That place is an utter fucking madhouse, and discussing this kind of stuff with anything other thandisdain represents a validation of the madhouse's "right" to be mad.

Trying to guess the identity of the leaker via speculation and theorizing over the possible motivations of Wikipedia "insiders" is a waste of time, just like engaging in protracted debate over who will win "Survivor" or "Big Brother" (is that still on the air?). Obviously, the arbitrators were greatly embarrassed and angered by the release of the emails. I would expect that they'll be trying to find out who did it for the rest of their time while involved with Wikipedia.

I understand and empathize with their outrage. Nevertheless, I also appreciated the insight into how inefficient and disfunctional their group problem-solving processes were/are. I and some others took the opportunity to provide them with some free advice on how to better operationalize and improve their deliberations and task-orientation. Hopefully, they considered some of that advice and, if so, allowed it to assuage some of their hurt over how it came about.